Michael Stuart Kelly

Root Admin
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Michael Stuart Kelly

  1. btw - This thing about determinism--both for and against--is another example of the error of reifying the part and calling it the whole.

    Many parts of human beings come as "the given" (already determined) and other parts are chosen by us.

    All throughout, there is one area that impacts both and it is generally ignored in O-Land: growth.

    It is a habit in O-Land to attribute growth to learning from experience, but it isn't the same.

    One does not learn eyesight from experience the same was as one learns to ride a bike from experience. One grows into eyesight and one cannot not grow into eyesight, however, one can refuse to learn to ride a bike.

    Learning how to see is instinctual. Learning how to ride a bike is not.


    • Upvote 2
  2. From what I read of Dennis's post, he was not a determinist.

    10 hours ago, Peter said:

    (quoting Dennis May):

    Reason [learned behavior] can overcome some instincts.

    That is not a statement a determinist writes.


  3. 2 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

    Rereading...hmmm... You said it was from the  old solohq site, but the Perry piece I found was from the newer site.


    It was probably my memory.

    No biggie.

    This is what happens when one posts without checking. 

    btw - Memory is a fascinating topic. Rand wrote very little about memory. I think the reality of it would have appalled her until she got used to it if she had learned the reality of it when she was alive.

    The way most people think about memory, at least long term memory, is that mental events and abstractions reside in your brain somewhere and you simply retrieve them as you need them. However, the way memory really works is more like the cloud in computing. Bits of the memory of, say, an event reside all over the friggin' place in your brain and a lot of them are redundant. When you want to recall something, your brain literally reconstructs the mental event from the bits and pieces that are all over the place. More often than not, bits and pieces from other events, from movies, from stories, from childhood traumas, and on and on get in and become part of your certainty of that event. That is, until you check.

    What's worse, that little sucker in your left brain Michael Gazzaniga calls "the interpreter" will simply make shit up if a bit or piece is missing from everywhere in your brain. That sucker exists to make sense of things even when they don't make sense. And since it has a lot to do, it will make up shit for the parts that don't fit at all so it can move on to other stuff.

    If you don't have good self-esteem and understand this, it can wreak havoc on your soul when you are wildly off.

    That doesn't give you an excuse to softly murmur the name of one lover in the ear of another while making love :) , but this stuff exists in all of us. Your memory is mostly correct except when it isn't. The best way with memory is the Reagan adage, trust but verify.


    I'll correct my other post so William Perry is no longer the source of the prosecutor's brief description of PARC. That was fun, but now that I know it's inaccurate, ah hell... :) 

    I am sure he will understand, though. He himself is a prosecutor. Ask any prosecutor on earth about the reliability of eye-witness accounts of a crime...



    • Upvote 1
  4. TG,

    That might be the one, but Perry is calling PARC a "closing argument" in that article.

    I specifically remember him calling it a prosecutorial brief or something like that back then.

    btw - I actually agree with his characterization in that article that it is a "closing argument," but only in the sense of boring the shit out of the jury and making them long for an easier death.

    There are much better ways of telling a story for a closing argument than droning on and on and on and on and on with a long-ass mostly irrelevant bill of trivia--unfairly interpreted to the most cherry-picked standards of logic most of the time at that.


    But who knows? Maybe my memory did play tricks on me. It wouldn't be the first time.

    I am certain of the Barbara story, though, and I have my emails with Perry to consult on the rest.


  5. This is where I have ALWAYS been.

    Why Trump’s Pivot Away From Pushing the Jabs Is a Bigger Deal Than Most Realize


    I generally do not watch Trump rallies. I don’t need to be convinced to vote for him should he decide to run in 2024 and unlike the current occupant of the White House, President Donald Trump can go without...

    From the article:


    It appears that the third option, which is not really a conspiracy, may have been true all along. He was just given bad data. We saw a glimpse of this when he told Candace Owens that people who get the jabs aren’t getting hospitalized or dying. It struck me as an odd exaggeration. He tends to embellish sometimes, but it was such an outrageously wrong statement that I started becoming hopeful that he’s just being told the wrong things by his own people.

    That’s why I watched most of his first rally. I wanted to see if he would change his tone on vaccines, and he did. This tells me the conspiracy theories that crept into my mind were likely wrong and he really was just being lied to by his own people. That’s not a good thing, but it’s far better than being compromised by either the Republican Establishment or the globalists.

    I’ll be watching closely at how he reacts when mentions of the jabs come up or if he reverts to pushing them again. In the meantime, I feel better knowing that as of now, he’s still the guy I will support.

    I think this is how the vast majority of his critical supporters feel about the vax issue.

    They know he corrects his errors--and changes his people--as he gains more information.


    • Upvote 1
  6. Here is a truth anyone looking into Q-related stuff should take into account.

    And let's not forget the collusion by the fake news media.

    It's called "controlling the narrative."

    Fortunately, Q did what it had to do--and did it brilliantly--before it got infiltrated.

    Like I've always said, it was one hell of a persuasion tool (using secrets, codes, metaphors, implied threats and comeuppances, and a whole slew of persuasion techniques, especially "word of mouth" enhancers).

    It kept the public focus on "fraudulent 2020 election" and "Deep State evil" ideas long enough for them to become un-erasable by the predator class propaganda machine.

    Then the infiltration happened, but they did it wrong. Their influence was like trying to catch fish in a river with one's bare hands. There was nothing to grab that would not easily slip away.

    Nowadays Q is a colorful part of history, no longer a cultural force.

    I feel privileged to have lived through it.

    What an achievement!



  7. 22 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

    It read like a prosecutor's brief.


    That "prosecutor's brief" idea came from a guy over on SoloHQ who took a year off from everything to reread everything Rand wrote. I can't remember his name right now, but we were in contact backstage. I will post his name if I remember it.

    This was a person who was not much of an active poster, or maybe he posted some, but was a low profile poster. So he was someone everyone knew, but few paid attention to as a shaker and maker.

    In the very early days of the PARC wars, he wrote an article or maybe a post about PARC where he characterized it as a "prosecutor's brief" and suddenly everybody and their families started calling PARC  a "prosecutor's brief." Nobody ever thought to credit this guy, though. I wish I could remember his name, but, alas, I am not eternal enough to figure out how to search for it in the old SoloHQ archives (over at RoR, it is hard enough and over at Solo Passion, the SoloHQ stuff now links to the Wayback Machine).

    And even in my own emails, without the guy's name, er... I just thought of something. I'm right now, this very minute, looking up "Hsieh" as a keyword in my emails.

    Voilà! The name is William Perry.



    ORIGINAL TEXT FROM MSK: I don't recall the article or post where he reframed PARC as a prosecutor's brief, but if someone has the patience to look, they will definitively find it.

    At least let it now be said--here, now and forever--that PARC as a prosecutor's brief was the idea of one William Perry.


    NOTE FROM MSK: Actually, TG, below, found the article and it was not "prosecutor's brief," but "closing argument" instead. Oh well. :) Please take that into account when reading this post and comments about it. 



    He also told me that among the people around Diana Hsieh at the time, they were discussing rehabilitating the Brandens in some form, but only after both of them had died. This was supposed to be punishment for what they did to Ayn Rand.

    NOTE FROM MSK: I am almost sure this came from him, but since I had a brain fart on the other, let me qualify it and say that information about rehabilitating the Brandens after they are dead might have come from someone else, but inside my mind (where angels fear to tread :) ) I am 99% sure is is Perry. So please understand that my certainty here as "almost sure." However, the story about me telling Barbara is 100% true.

    All I could do was take that in without comment at the time and wonder, what's wrong with these people? Talk about an excess of control-freakness.

    I made the mistake of telling Barbara this and she looked like I just drove a stake through her heart. She didn't speak--deadly silence--for about 5 minutes as she looked without blinking at a spot on the ground.

    I never said this in public before because I didn't want to give the knuckleheads the satisfaction of knowing their malice had caused hurt to Barbara. They would interpret it as her feeling ashamed and that was not what she conveyed to me. Her hurt was more in the way of knowing that people in the movement she loved so dearly hated her for real, in reality, not in hyperbole. 

    But I don't think any of this matters much anymore. Why? Because the influence of that whole PARC culture in spinning all Branden-related issues in a grossly distorted manner--and, quite frankly, most of those people--don't matter anymore.

    Like you said, PARC is unfixable. That includes what it stands for. So that's the important part: the result--not the mind-numbing hairsplitting over every word the Brandens ever uttered and every deed they ever did and every evil thought that could be imputed to them as their own thinking. That fringe will never go away, but at least it will remain fringe.

    History as understood by the majority will not be rewritten by boneheads. Never fear, though. There will always be boneheads. They are like the poor, they will always be with us.


    btw - I am at odds with Leonard Peikoff on many things, but I just don't see him participating in lying to the public until the Brandens died in order to punish them. I see his anti-Branden efforts in light of his beliefs about Rand, but not to the extent of becoming a dishonest historian in order to punish anyone.

    In fact, not too long after I got that email, maybe it was a year or two, Hsieh was no longer in the good graces of Peikoff and his peeps.

    Someone even made a website complaining about her and a small tribe of the pro-Peikovians signed on. The website was--and still is--called Checking Premises. They said it wasn't only about Hsieh, but she is practically all they wrote about with a couple of general CYA articles thrown in. I think all this started when she began discussing the morality of cannibalism through an Objectivist filter. Seriously. :) 

    I had to do some real research to come up with some of this, especially names. They were nowhere to be found in my memory. Not readily.

    Am I getting old or is this stuff just not important?


    Ah... O-Land... Where would I be without ye?...



  8. 16 hours ago, anthony said:

    Only, that's not instinct.

    I wish Rand had not made such a war on the word "instinct."

    Everything becomes the word.

    (Everything bad in this case.)

    Here's a smart-ass one for ya': In the beginning there was the word...


    This constantly stifles discussion about concepts.

    Instinct is not the formal name of the Boogie Man except in O-Land...


  9. 2 minutes ago, anthony said:

    Yes, I was struggling to put a name on the fallacy a day ago...


    To be clear, there is a herding component to the way primates exist.

    It would be a mistake to eliminate this, just as it is a mistake to reify it to be The One True Way.

    So much more exists on top of it, so much that evolved after that part became a fixed behavior during evolution.

    I understand reason and volition within this context. There is a prewired part of the brain and there is a free part (volition and reason) that we control as independent minds or souls or whatever one wants to call our independent self-aware selves.

    In fact, it's a good thing we do control this because some of the prewired stuff is no longer relevant to human life in the 21st century and can be quite destructive in a "Bull in a China Shop" way. So, through neuroplasticity, we can accommodate this by training and lessen any destructiveness when it exists.

    This is different than trying to force evolution into a superhuman direction (like the transhumanists and eugenicists want to do). It is simply using reason on our physical brain as it exists for values relevant to our time.


  10. 5 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

    It's not for nothing that Chris Matthew Sciabarra ended Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical with a warning about "the fallacy of reification":


    I did not get my idea from Chris, and to my shame, I have not yet read his book. I only skimmed it. And I have both editions. :) 

    But from your sporadic references to it, you are encouraging me to read it as it should be read.


    • Upvote 1
  11. 22 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

    Elections have consequences.

    And this one--Youngkin--looks like a huge relief to MAGA people after he got sworn in.

    And look who has to be a clown on his way out.

    Ralph Northam Pardons Democrat State Senator Jailed For Underage Sex Crimes in His Final Act as Virginia Governor


    Governor Blackface-Klansman Ralph Northam pardoned a Democrat who was jailed for underage sex crimes in his final act as Virginia governor. Northam pardoned Democrat state senator Joe Morrissey...

    Good riddance to that trash.


    • Upvote 1
  12. 2 hours ago, anthony said:

    Shifting the left further from reason. And especially, from vestiges of volition towards determinism...


    This is a habit I see everywhere. And I think I know one of the key errors that cause it other than denying determinism or volition. (The correct is to understand when each applies.)

    There is an epistemological error along the way.

    The error is to reify a part and pretend it is the whole.

    For example, you know I have been studying the brain, persuasion and all the rest. A lot of the brain and mind mechanisms work outside of volition--subconsciously. But to many people, that means volition does not exist, only subconscious processes do. And that's garbage.


    Ditto for the contrary here in O-Land. A lot of people think only volition exists where there are indications of subconscious processes. But that's garbage, too.

    Even Rand made this error by claiming that the development of eyesight in an infant is by volition. (The truth is, an infant has no capacity to choose to be blind.)

    I am pretty sure I know where she was coming from, though. It was not just a simple adherence to a dogma. She did not accept Aristotle's idea of final causation (a predetermined cause like a tree seed growing into a tree and not a flower).

    The development of eyesight because nothing but eyesight could be developed in the eyes of infants was too close to volition automatically developing because the end result of volition was predetermined--that was too close for comfort. Rand's whole premise is that we choose to think or not to think. Full stop. Period.


    From my own observation, though, I see a lot of this stuff is like breathing. You breathe automatically, but you can choose to breathe, too. Without the more primitive automation, the choice does not come into being. But the contrary is not true. Even when you do not choose to breathe, you still automatically breathe. You can't turn it off by will except for very short periods.

    But once choice kicks in, you can take it far in expanding the capacity. I, myself, was one of the best trombonists in Brazil during a short time. One plays trombone by breathing--and by chosen structured breathing at that. If I had only relied on automatic breathing, I would have never achieved what I did.

    Ditto for volition. We use reason everyday, but only up to a point. To take it further, we have to choose.

    Ditto for eyesight, in fact. Learning how to see is automatic. As the faculty develops, the growing child can choose what to look at at times while automatically looking at other things times.


    I'm in a discussion right now where the premise of the other side is--because power exists outside of government without government constraints, that means government power with government constraints does not exist.

    It's the same fallacy: reifying a part and trying to make it the whole.

    Reality is not complicit in that fallacy. Reality continues to be what it is despite any and all rationalizations. 


    In fact, sometimes reality destroys those who commit the fallacy, including many people around them--just look at communist governments. Their theory works in one context, so for them it works in all contexts. Then reality steps in and piles of corpses mount up.

    Even the USA has committed that fallacy--often--in its foreign policy (spreading Western democracy--by force at that--will be universally accepted, in other words, it's accepted as good by the majority in the Western civilization context, so that means it's accepted as good by the majority in ALL contexts). But look what reality brought.

    Reality is like the honey badger. It don't give a shit.



  13. 3 hours ago, Dglgmut said:

    Constraining power is a myth.


    Why? Because you said so?

    Yeah, right...

    To you that foot I'm looking at is an airplane. But you will never get me to agree to that.

    I have an independent rational mind and functioning eyes and I use them all.

    So enjoy your proclamations and posturing. They have no persuasion with me.


  14. Finally someone in Beijing got infected with Omicron.

    Since this is 20 days out from the Olympics, and the Omicron variant infects even faster than logarithms go, this will turn the Olympics into the largest super-spreader event in history.

    Then this could happen:

    Prepare for the 'mother of all supply chain stumbles' if Omicron sweeps across Asia and raises the risk of factory shutdowns, analyst warns


    "Asian production networks, hitherto impressively resilient, may be thrown into a funk as Omicron grips the region," an HSBC economist wrote.


    At the very least, this is going to be the mother of all pickles for the predator class. See here:


    Beijing Olympics Will Be The Largest Super Spreader Event In History

    Omicron essentially immunizes large populations against the coronavirus--and quickly--better than any vaccine ever could.

    How to justify the power grab after that?



    But there's that Ebola-like thing in China. That's worrisome. And the CCP ain't talking about what it is. They're just shutting down cities with millions of inhabitants in them and they ain't talking.


  15. I was just watching Steve Bannon and the War Room and he made a few incredible points.

    The first is that the Arizona Senate (and other state congresses) will get back in session next week, so Trump's rally in Phoenix, Arizona (which you can see here on OL) was essentially the beginning of the decertification process for the 2020 election.

    Don't forget that talk about decertification kind of fizzled for a while. This was because state legislatures were in recess. Now it will start up again.

    Trump mentioned in the rally that a whole lot of evidence of the 2020 election fraud is coming very shortly.



  16. As of this posting, they are still processing the video from live broadcast to replay, but pretty soon the replay should be finished.


    President Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America, will hold a rally in Florence, Arizona, on Saturday, January 15, 2022, at 7:00PM MST. Venue: Country Thunder Festival Grounds

    And here it is at President Trump's own Rumble account, with the same observation about processing:


    LIVESTREAM WILL BEGIN WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP ARRIVES President Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America, Delivers Remarks in Florence, Arizona, on Saturday, January...

    I came in late, but I caught most of it and this was one hell of a rally.

    President Trump basically said when power is restored to the MAGA people, they are only going to clean up the mess the Biden people made, they are going to hold the criminals to account. He's obviously talking about the current administration and illegal aliens Biden let in, but he also singled out the murderer of Ashli Babbitt.

    I also liked it when he was talking about AT&T getting rid of OAN on DirectTV.

    He said he promised to OAN people he would not use the world boycott. So he said real loud and several times that he was not going to say, "Boycott AT&T!" He just wasn't going to say it. You won't hear him say, "Boycott AT&T!"  :) 

    Trump said many things people have been waiting to hear. I think he's waited to address them on purpose. It's the discipline of a winner.

    He knows about timing.

    Still, it was great to hear him back in top form.


  17. 4 hours ago, anthony said:

    Of course they "fear freedom"! Their own, and more critically, the freedom by individualists who reject them.


    I going to go real Rand on this.

    The people of the epistemology you and D are talking about fear something else far more than individualism, freedom, being disconnected from a group and all the rest.

    They fear reason.

    They are terrified of reason and of those who use it.

    They know for certain they don't measure up and it kills them inside.

    Reason is not something one does collectively. That is, reason in the sense I am talking about (thinking independently to the best of one's ability using reality as the frame).

    Reason in that sense can only happen individually, subjectively if you will. One cannot reason for another. Each person is alone in performing it. Each person is solely responsible for his or her own brain.

    If two people or more are reasoning individually, then they can reason together. Correct each other. And so on. But if one of them is not reasoning individually, then they are playing a sucker's game, not reasoning together. And the one using reason is the sucker.

    From observing over a lifetime, reason scares the living shit out of them. They don't want to be the sucker and they Long for somebody else to blame for their shortcomings, insecurities and screw-ups.

    And they want to spit themselves out of life where they have to die in the end. They don't know how to live, but they are terrified of dying. They don't want to see this and they hunger to blame the people who do for the fact that that death in the end is just the way it is. 

    So they try to kill reason. Then they don't have to see or think when the urge for blank-out hits them.

    Even when they don't use the word reason, they try to kill reason.


  18. 4 hours ago, Dglgmut said:

    What The Constitution says and how things actually work are, obviously, two different things. We can see that the rules are being made by the universities and the media, not the elected officials. Power exists outside of the government, and it has not been sliced up... and it can't be. It will always exist. If you get rid of it in one place, it will pop up somewhere else. That's what happened. And the people can't do anything about it because conservatives continue to spread the myth that you just expressed. People think they can replace leadership with an objective system. It won't happen until we evolve into something else.


    I could not disagree with you more.

    And I mean in practically every word you just posted, including "the" and "and."

    I think the USA system of government rocks. Not just in theory, but in practice.

    It is still standing despite all the crap people have thrown at it for centuries. Even a Civil War.

    I, for one, have no intention of undermining it from the inside with little bitty weak and gloomy opinions posing as facts.

    I have no metaphysical negativity to contribute. And I certainly do not want to be anything other than a human being. I do not want to evolve into "something else."

    You can try to become some kind of freak of nature if you like. Just leave me out of it.


    Of course power exists outside of government. What has that got to do with checks and balances keeping the government together?

    Nothing, that's what.

    Even the mafia could not take out the US government.


    You think checks and balances is a myth? It's one of the fundamental parts that took human nature into account.

    The Constitution was made to organize human beings, real human beings, human beings as they exist, not opinions dressed up as humans. The Constitution is a system with enough flexibility built in to expand and contract to cover differences in humans and historical phases during the ups and downs of time. Life--including human life--happens in waves, not a straight line. The Constitution was not designed as an epistemological straightjacket to play gotchas with.

    And even so, how you manage to look at three different branches of government and say checks and balances do not exist is beyond me. We're back to looking at a foot and calling it an airplane.


    In O-Land, it's popular to derive reality from principles instead of looking at reality and getting principles from there. But as the lady said, A is A. That is not going to change no matter what your opinions are. 

    From what I have been reading of your posts, I sense rationalizing from proclamations is your method of cognition for the most part.

    So enjoy your semi-woke negative epistemology. See what world you build with it. Heh... I won't hold my breath.

    You are right that I do not think that way.



  19. On 11/3/2021 at 6:19 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

    Here's how Bannon put it.


    Steve Bannon and The War Room opened was a must-see on Wednesday morning following Glenn Youngkin’s victory in Virginia last night. Bannon declared the Biden presidency...

    Lame duck.

    First you wound it.

    Then you kill it.

    Elections have consequences.

    And this one--Youngkin--looks like a huge relief to MAGA people after he got sworn in.

    He's also further wounding the lame duck Biden. :) 


    UPDATE: Virginia Governor Youngkin Signs 11 Executive Actions on First Day in Office Including Banning CRT, Ending Vax Mandate, Ending School Mask Mandate, etc.


    Republican Glenn Youngkin was sworn in as Virginia’s 74th Governor on Saturday. Youngkin is the first Republican governor of Virginia in over 10 years. Youngkin defeated dirty Clintonite Terry McAuliffe in...

    From the article:


    Republican Glenn Youngkin was sworn in as Virginia’s 74th Governor on Saturday.

    Youngkin is the first Republican governor of Virginia in over 10 years.

    . . .

    Here is a list of the executive actions, via WFIR.

    Executive Orders:

    • Executive Order Number Two delivers on his Day One promise to empower Virginia parents in their children’s education and upbringing by allowing parents to make decisions on whether their child wears a mask in school.
    • Read the full text of Executive Order Number Two.
    Executive Directive:

    This was a pleasant surprise to many Americans.


    That nice, great, wonderful, but there's more .

    Virginia’s New Attorney General Fires 30 Staff Members, Announces Major Investigations within Hours of Taking Office


    Virginia’s new Attorney General Jason Miyares fired 30 staff members and announced investigations into the Virginia Parole Board and Loudoun County Schools within hours of being sworn into office. Mr...

    From the article:


    Virginia’s new Attorney General Jason Miyares fired 30 staff members and announced investigations into the Virginia Parole Board and Loudoun County Schools within hours of being sworn into office.

    Mr. Miyares was sworn in as Virginia’s Attorney General on Saturday and he’s already cleaning house.

    “One of the reasons Virginians get so fed up with government is the lack of transparency – and that’s a big issue here,” Miyares wrote. “The Virginia Parole Board broke the law when they let out murders, rapists, and cop killers early on their sentences without notifying the victims. Loudoun Country Public Schools covered up a sexual assault on school grounds for political gain, leading to an additional assault of a young girl.”

    Virginia State Senator Louise Lucas claimed Miyares fired the entire Civil Rights division, however the AG’s spokesperson said only two staffers from that division were let go on Saturday.

    “There are 12 individuals who work in the Office of Civil Rights – only two personnel changes were made,” Miyares spox Victoria LaCivita said.

    Miyares will reportedly be prosecuting criminal cases in jurisdictions where Soros DAs declined to prosecute.

    I am from Virginia. I was born and raised there.

    I have never felt like moving back after I left.

    But, man, did this start an old itch.

    Virginia might be livable again, who knows?



    • Upvote 1